Championship 2018-19

[SIMON GARNERS 194]

Rovers are bedding in very nicely in this league..top 10 finish would be great and I think we are more than capable.

[Bigdoggsteel]

Chaddy you said on here during the summer that Ipswich have a great squad! You said Mcarthy was under achieving. I remember us having this debate 

[chaddyrovers]

50 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Totally agree @DE. I didnt know about them chants specifically but obviously its well publicised what the fans thought of McCarthy, and the ridiculous part is that he was criticised for occasionally giving a bit back!

@chaddyrovers who were these decent players who he could have played exciting, winning football with? How do you get bored of regular overachievement?

In his full seasons there, he finished 9th, 6th, 7th, 16th and 12th.

For a good few years, his only transfer buy was famously to replace Aaron Cresswell, buying Tyrone Mings for 10k from non-league who he then sold at a massive profit. He would have loved to spend the money that Hirst has been able to, after selling a few of cheap McCarthy signings in Garner, Webster and Waghorn that he was allowed towards the end of his tenure.

May I ask a question chaddy. The squad Hirst inherited you have described as one that is capable of playing decent football, and theyve only been out of the top half once in the last 5 years. They have added some players for decent fees, including Jon Nolan and Gwion Edwards, 2 players you repeatedly suggested as potential signings for Rovers during the summer. So why is 21st now a good achievement for them?

Cos Ipswich fans wanted more. Ask them. plenty on twitter and other fan sites will answer your questions. You can play good football on any budget. Look at Stanley or Scunthorpe under Alexander. McCarthy could play a different way with Garner, McGoldrick, Waghorn and Sears. Plus he had Jonny Williams and Ward at that time. 

Maybe Ipswich fans took their frustration out on McCarthy cos of the lack of investment of their owner Marcus Evans. But its the same now. Lack of investment from him. 

Its Paul Hurst not Hirst like David Hirst.

To answer your question, Cos they have lost Waghorn, Garner and McGoldrick all in one transfer window and brought in Walters, Jackson and Harrison who 2 haven't played this level. Its Hurst 1st season at this level. Edwards and Nolan have never played at this level before so will take time to adjust and adapt unlike McCarthy's signings of Waghorn and Garner who played at this level before. 

Yes I understand why they pick Hurst in the end. They could have gone for Grayson or Bowyer or Alexander or Keith Hill. Maybe Grayson wasn't interested in the job due lack of investment. probably why he jump ship from Preston to Sunderland so quickly. 

 

47 minutes ago, S8 & Blue said:

I don’t know if Hurst can though.

Thought it was a strange remedy anyway... correct me if I’m wrong because it might be my mind playing tricks -

But didn’t Shrewsbury do so well last season by being physical, direct and grinding out narrow, ugly victories?

Yes he did. 

[chaddyrovers]

12 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

Chaddy you said on here during the summer that Ipswich have a great squad! You said Mcarthy was under achieving. I remember us having this debate 

great? did I used that specific word? Can you show me where I said this please

Edited September 23, 2018 by chaddyrovers

[jim mk2]

Ipswich fans are getting what they deserve. Thery more or less forced out an excellent manager in Mick McCarthy, demanding change and championship manager type football, and now they are getting to realise that it doesn't work. For clubs like Ipswich with little money to spend pragmatism is always the best policy . Spoke to an Ipswich fan last week asnd he says he's rather get relegated playing "good football" than have McCarthy and be a strong and stable Championship club. How daft can you get? 

[Bigdoggsteel]

23 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

great? did I used that specific word? Can you show me where I said this please

I doubt I can find it in all the posts and I'm not going to even try , but pretty sure you did. You said they had a great squad and that Mcarthy was underachieving. OK, if you said they had a good squad, do remember saying Mcarthy was underachieving? 

Edited September 23, 2018 by Bigdoggsteel

[roversfan99]

31 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

Cos Ipswich fans wanted more. Ask them. plenty on twitter and other fan sites will answer your questions. You can play good football on any budget. Look at Stanley or Scunthorpe under Alexander. McCarthy could play a different way with Garner, McGoldrick, Waghorn and Sears. Plus he had Jonny Williams and Ward at that time. 

Maybe Ipswich fans took their frustration out on McCarthy cos of the lack of investment of their owner Marcus Evans. But its the same now. Lack of investment from him. 

Its Paul Hurst not Hirst like David Hirst.

To answer your question, Cos they have lost Waghorn, Garner and McGoldrick all in one transfer window and brought in Walters, Jackson and Harrison who 2 haven't played this level. Its Hurst 1st season at this level. Edwards and Nolan have never played at this level before so will take time to adjust and adapt unlike McCarthy's signings of Waghorn and Garner who played at this level before. 

Yes I understand why they pick Hurst in the end. They could have gone for Grayson or Bowyer or Alexander or Keith Hill. Maybe Grayson wasn't interested in the job due lack of investment. probably why he jump ship from Preston to Sunderland so quickly. 

 

Yes he did. 

Firstly, you seem to be being particularly pedantic regarding spelling, thats twice in a few days youve corrected me which considering your own spelling is quite rich.

But im not interested in Ipswich fans' opinions, I was asking for yours. 

Not sure why you have mentioned them 2 lower league teams, if you cant see that there is a fairly strong correlation between the budget you have to spend on players and the style of football those players will be able to play then lets leave it there.

I am not saying that they should sack him now. My question was specific to the fact that you said that 21st AT THE END OF THE SEASON would be "job done." That is with the majority of a squad that has consistently been a top half squad under a manager you clearly dont overly rate in Mick McCarthy. And with a few new players that you have specifically stated that you rate enough to have at your own club, who you expect to be finishing well above 21st.

[Butty]

35 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

I doubt I can find it in all the posts and I'm not going to even try , but pretty sure you did. You said they had a great squad and that Mcarthy was underachieving. OK, if you said they had a good squad, do remember saying Mcarthy was underachieving? 

I certainly remember Chaddy slating McCarthy all summer. He clearly doesn’t like him for whatever reason but what he did with that Ipswich side with no money for however many seasons was an over achievement rather than an under achievement. Anyone could see that. Things went a bit stale for him there last season and the fans had had enough, if McCarthy takes over any side in this league this season or next, I wouldn’t back that side to go down. 

[roversfan99]

39 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

I doubt I can find it in all the posts and I'm not going to even try , but pretty sure you did. You said they had a great squad and that Mcarthy was underachieving. OK, if you said they had a good squad, do remember saying Mcarthy was underachieving? 

Hes being pedantic over wording and spelling to cover the fact that his argument is full of holes.

[DE.]

1 hour ago, Butty said:

I certainly remember Chaddy slating McCarthy all summer. He clearly doesn’t like him for whatever reason but what he did with that Ipswich side with no money for however many seasons was an over achievement rather than an under achievement. Anyone could see that. Things went a bit stale for him there last season and the fans had had enough, if McCarthy takes over any side in this league this season or next, I wouldn’t back that side to go down. 

The fans turned really nasty and Mick responded in kind. Once it gets to that point you're basically done (unless you're Steve Kean).

Ipswich fans were aiming their anger in the wrong direction though. Yes the football was shit, and yes they were paying a premium to watch it, but it all comes down to Marcus Evans and the tight budget restraints the club is working under. Mick was never the problem there, he was just the guy who took the bullets because Evans likes to hide in the shadows. 

I don't wish ill on Hurst or Ipswich as a club, I obviously have a soft spot for them (except when they're playing us), but a lot of the fans are reaping what they've sown and are still struggling to come to terms with the reality of the situation. They had a very good Championship manager at the helm who was focused purely on getting results from a team that could generously be described as average but in truth was pretty poor. His departure alienated the few better players there who knew Mick was getting the best out of them and their less talented team mates. 

Hurst's biggest hurdle would have been winning the respect of those players. He's come in as a much less experienced manager and almost immediately started shooting his mouth off about how the team wasn't good enough and players weren't at the level he felt was necessary. He came in and undoubtedly got some player's backs up instantly with such blunt public comments. The start they've had will only solidified in the players' minds that they're working with a much less talented manager and the motivation to play for the fans probably isn't there either as most of them fully backed Mick whenever asked about how he was being treated. 

Under normal circumstances I wouldn't advocate removing a manager so early in his tenure - but there are a lot of things working against Hurst, some of which he has brought on himself. How many games without a win do they go before they make a decision? 12 games? 15 games? 20 games? Right now they're fortunate enough to still be within a single win of escaping the drop zone. In a few games time they may be looking at a much bleaker picture.

Their next two games are Birmingham (A) and Boro (H). Fail to win either of those and there would have to be some serious consideration towards making a change before it really is too late. We saw with Coyle that waiting too long means that even if you get the right guy in, it may not be enough. I genuinely believe Mowbray would have kept us up in 16/17 if he'd been brought in a month or two earlier. None of us wanted to give Coyle until the end of the season because it was obvious we were dead in the water with him in charge. That time may come for Ipswich, too, if they don't start picking up results very quickly.

[JacknOry]

24 minutes ago, DE. said:

The fans turned really nasty and Mick responded in kind. Once it gets to that point you're basically done (unless you're Steve Kean).

Ipswich fans were aiming their anger in the wrong direction though. Yes the football was shit, and yes they were paying a premium to watch it, but it all comes down to Marcus Evans and the tight budget restraints the club is working under. Mick was never the problem there, he was just the guy who took the bullets because Evans likes to hide in the shadows. 

I don't wish ill on Hurst or Ipswich as a club, I obviously have a soft spot for them (except when they're playing us), but a lot of the fans are reaping what they've sown and are still struggling to come to terms with the reality of the situation. They had a very good Championship manager at the helm who was focused purely on getting results from a team that could generously be described as average but in truth was pretty poor. His departure alienated the few better players there who knew Mick was getting the best out of them and their less talented team mates. 

Hurst's biggest hurdle would have been winning the respect of those players. He's come in as a much less experienced manager and almost immediately started shooting his mouth off about how the team wasn't good enough and players weren't at the level he felt was necessary. He came in and undoubtedly got some player's backs up instantly with such blunt public comments. The start they've had will only solidified in the players' minds that they're working with a much less talented manager and the motivation to play for the fans probably isn't there either as most of them fully backed Mick whenever asked about how he was being treated. 

Under normal circumstances I wouldn't advocate removing a manager so early in his tenure - but there are a lot of things working against Hurst, some of which he has brought on himself. How many games without a win do they go before they make a decision? 12 games? 15 games? 20 games? Right now they're fortunate enough to still be within a single win of escaping the drop zone. In a few games time they may be looking at a much bleaker picture.

Their next two games are Birmingham (A) and Boro (H). Fail to win either of those and there would have to be some serious consideration towards making a change before it really is too late. We saw with Coyle that waiting too long means that even if you get the right guy in, it may not be enough. I genuinely believe Mowbray would have kept us up in 16/17 if he'd been brought in a month or two earlier. None of us wanted to give Coyle until the end of the season because it was obvious we were dead in the water with him in charge. That time may come for Ipswich, too, if they don't start picking up results very quickly.

Great post.

[chaddyrovers]

 

1 hour ago, roversfan99 said:

Firstly, you seem to be being particularly pedantic regarding spelling, thats twice in a few days youve corrected me which considering your own spelling is quite rich.

But im not interested in Ipswich fans' opinions, I was asking for yours. 

Not sure why you have mentioned them 2 lower league teams, if you cant see that there is a fairly strong correlation between the budget you have to spend on players and the style of football those players will be able to play then lets leave it there.

I am not saying that they should sack him now. My question was specific to the fact that you said that 21st AT THE END OF THE SEASON would be "job done." That is with the majority of a squad that has consistently been a top half squad under a manager you clearly dont overly rate in Mick McCarthy. And with a few new players that you have specifically stated that you rate enough to have at your own club, who you expect to be finishing well above 21st.

Stanley havs proved have lower budget means you can still achieve promotion. Burnley did under Dyche aswell. Even Burton did it to achieve to championship 3 season ago. 

2 players I mention thats it. Edwards was a good signing but losing Waghorn and Garner will affect them badly. 

I wouldnt want McCarthy anywhere our club. Not a fan of his tactics or his style. 

1 hour ago, roversfan99 said:

Hes being pedantic over wording and spelling to cover the fact that his argument is full of holes.

No holes just you cant accept my view. 

[SBlue]

At least you’re not as bad as that bloke that said a few weeks ago we would regret not sacking Mowbray and getting Hurst in this summer.

That comment will stay with me for life.

[roversfan99]

4 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

 

Stanley havs proved have lower budget means you can still achieve promotion. Burnley did under Dyche aswell. Even Burton did it to achieve to championship 3 season ago. 

2 players I mention thats it. Edwards was a good signing but losing Waghorn and Garner will affect them badly. 

I wouldnt want McCarthy anywhere our club. Not a fan of his tactics or his style. 

No holes just you cant accept my view. 

Your point was to play attractive football and how it is possible?! Not teams getting results/promotion on lower budgets.

I cant profess to know how Accrington Stanley play, even if it is open, attractive football there will always be exceptions to the rule, but in the fourth tier there is naturally less of a financial chasm between top and bottom anyway. Burnley in particular and Burton both rely on organisation and substance over style, because they have low budgets. So them examples back my argument up if anything!

Your argument/points change from post to post. My point was, why with the majority of a squad who finishes 12th last season, is 21st now acceptable only a season on?

Yes they sold 3 very good McCarthy signings on for a profit but Hurst been able to spend lots of that money (probably more than McCarthy was allowed in his whole tenure) and has done partially on players you rate. So why after that is a drop of 9 league places acceptable?

Also, as has been mentioned, Shrewsbury werent a team that played attractive football so the managerial change made no sense anyway if that was the reason.

No one mentioned anything about him coming here. That comment shows you seemingly just dislike him as a person IMO.

[JacknOry]

41 minutes ago, S8 & Blue said:

At least you’re not as bad as that bloke that said a few weeks ago we would regret not sacking Mowbray and getting Hurst in this summer.

That comment will stay with me for life.

Who said that?

[JacknOry]

Hurst is underperforming no matter what Chaddy says - he is just defending him because he is backed into a corner having said he understands why Ipswich fans wanted him gone.

[JacknOry]

Funny thing is that Chaddy states style of football is more important than results and can emphasise with the low-spending Ipswich (which are now bound for league 1) fans but now Stoke fans are calling for Mick McCarthy to come in. 

Stoke fans want results, all fans want results.

Edited September 23, 2018 by JacknOry

[SBlue]

9 minutes ago, JacknOry said:

Who said that?

I won’t start a witch hunt, but it was in the transfer window meltdown.

Ill save it for when Hurst gets the boot

[JacknOry]

Just now, S8 & Blue said:

I won’t start a witch hunt, but it was in the transfer window meltdown.

Ill save it for when Hurst gets the boot

Hurst did a decent job at Shrewsbury but I think he is being found out a little. its all very well recruiting from lower leagues in L1 but when you are up against teams splashing millions - you either need to get very lucky, unnearth the new Shearer or sell your soul to the devil to get anywhere in the Championship.

Think he took too many players from the league below that are not quite up to it.

[SBlue]

Just now, JacknOry said:

Hurst did a decent job at Shrewsbury but I think he is being found out a little. its all very well recruiting from lower leagues in L1 but when you are up against teams splashing millions - you either need to get very lucky, unnearth the new Shearer or sell your soul to the devil to get anywhere in the Championship.

Think he took too many players from the league below that are not quite up to it.

I just think he’s a bit of a cocky get, personally. He was having a go at his own fans, the fixtures, whatever last season as his lucky hoof ball stopped working. Think he’s called out the players at Ipswich already.

Can imagine going from McCarthy to him as a senior pro would be quite galling tbh

[DE.]

There was an interesting post match quote from Hurst in the paper:

"I spoke to the players and said if I, in any way shape or form, am making it more difficult for you to play then please come and see me and I’ll try and take that away. Because it’s not a difficult place to play of in terms of fans getting on at the players. There are a helluva lot worse places."

Once again subtly blaming the players and absolving himself of any wrongdoing. He's essentially telling them (via public medium) "if you've got a problem with me, say so, or you're the ones at fault, not me".

IMV that's bad management. Good managers rarely shift the blame onto the players, they take it all themselves. There's a number of reasons the players were so loyal to McCarthy and that was one of them. Hurst has a lot to learn.

[Norbert Rassragr]

What you highlighted there DE is why I think Mourinho has lost it at Man Utd, and how Ferguson was so good at complaining about the ref, or whatever when Keane had a mental and kicked someone.

[DE.]

9 minutes ago, Norbert Rassragr said:

What you highlighted there DE is why I think Mourinho has lost it at Man Utd, and how Ferguson was so good at complaining about the ref, or whatever when Keane had a mental and kicked someone.

Yeah, agreed. The sad fact is that top level football is now all about catering to players' egos. The days of the fire-breathing manager are gone - at the top two levels anyway. I think it'll still work to some degree in League One and below, but it's a totally different game once you get any higher. 

[K-Hod]

2 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

 

Stanley havs proved have lower budget means you can still achieve promotion. Burnley did under Dyche aswell. Even Burton did it to achieve to championship 3 season ago. 

2 players I mention thats it. Edwards was a good signing but losing Waghorn and Garner will affect them badly. 

I wouldnt want McCarthy anywhere our club. Not a fan of his tactics or his style. 

No holes just you cant accept my view. 

I wouldn’t use Burnley as an example of attractive football on a lower budget, Chaddy....

It seems like you’re using two different arguments and getting confused, hence the perceived holes. 

Low budgets can sometimes lead to successful football, similarly football that prioritises style over substance can be successful.

But it tends to be the case that the teams that spend the most, have the most success as they can afford the best players. Who in turn, play the most attractive football....

[chaddyrovers]

2 hours ago, roversfan99 said:

Your point was to play attractive football and how it is possible?! Not teams getting results/promotion on lower budgets.

I cant profess to know how Accrington Stanley play, even if it is open, attractive football there will always be exceptions to the rule, but in the fourth tier there is naturally less of a financial chasm between top and bottom anyway. Burnley in particular and Burton both rely on organisation and substance over style, because they have low budgets. So them examples back my argument up if anything!

Your argument/points change from post to post. My point was, why with the majority of a squad who finishes 12th last season, is 21st now acceptable only a season on?

Yes they sold 3 very good McCarthy signings on for a profit but Hurst been able to spend lots of that money (probably more than McCarthy was allowed in his whole tenure) and has done partially on players you rate. So why after that is a drop of 9 league places acceptable?

Also, as has been mentioned, Shrewsbury werent a team that played attractive football so the managerial change made no sense anyway if that was the reason.

No one mentioned anything about him coming here. That comment shows you seemingly just dislike him as a person IMO.

Firstly, Stanley play good attacking football. Why not head down on a day when Rovers are playing. 

Majority of squad from last season? Hurst has made 12 new signings this season so hardly majority of the same squad from last season. Plus the majority of them haven't played championship football or very little. 

Waghorn, Garner and McGoldrick gone. Replace by one experience striker and 2 unproven players at this level. 

On money spent, Hurst spent about 4.5 to 5 million on new players plus sold players totally 11 million. So roughly had 40-45 % of the money. https://www.transfermarkt.com/ipswich-town/transfers/verein/677

Look at the reasons why McCarthy left first. 

Dislike McCarthy? He just the sort of manager we dont need imo.